Validated compatibility · No adapter required

Mneme HQ + Paperclip

Paperclip’s claude_local adapter drives Claude Code in your project workspace — so Mneme’s existing PreToolUse hook enforcement applies unchanged. A P1-gated validation run (August 22–23, 2026) proved deterministic enforcement under both Paperclip transports with zero Mneme code changes.

Validation verdict: native PASS, no code required

The compatibility experiment closed with a frozen manifest, an A/B/C × T1–T4 run matrix, and published raw artifacts (transcripts, hook verdict logs, run logs). Results:

This is why the badge reads “Validated compatibility,” not “Native integration.” Mneme works unchanged through Paperclip’s transports — there is no dedicated Mneme-Paperclip adapter to maintain.

How it works

Paperclip (claude_local adapter)
   
spawns Claude Code in the project workspace
   
.claude/settings.json PreToolUse hook → mneme-hook
   
mneme check against the workspace's
.mneme/project_memory.json

Requirements are the same as any other Claude Code setup:

{
  "hooks": {
    "PreToolUse": [
      {
        "matcher": "Edit|Write|MultiEdit",
        "hooks": [{ "type": "command", "command": "mneme-hook", "timeout": 30 }]
      }
    ]
  }
}

Proven configuration

Version-specific caveat: paperclipai 2026.817.0

Known upstream defect. Paperclip injects a placeholder ANTHROPIC_API_KEY="sk-ant-..." into spawned Claude processes, which overrides subscription login and fails every run with 401. Workaround — set an empty override on the agent:

{ "adapterConfig": { "env": { "ANTHROPIC_API_KEY": "" } } }

This is a Paperclip-side issue, not a Mneme issue. Fixed upstream versions may make the override unnecessary; remove it once the injection is resolved.

Operational notes

Evidence

FAQ

Does Mneme need an adapter to work with Paperclip?
No. Paperclip’s claude_local adapter spawns Claude Code in the project workspace, so Mneme’s existing .claude/settings.json PreToolUse hook applies unchanged. The validation closed with a NO CODE REQUIRED verdict.
Which Paperclip transports were validated?
Both: the classic CLI engine (engine:"cli") and the default ACP transport (engine:auto resolving to ACP). Both enforced identically across the full test matrix.
What did the validation actually prove?
6/6 forbidden edits blocked at the hook layer; every compliant edit landed; block-to-recover cycles completed in both transports; isolation held via fixture-unique sentinel decision IDs. Zero Mneme production modifications were needed.
Is there a known Paperclip version issue?
One config-level caveat: paperclipai 2026.817.0 injects a placeholder ANTHROPIC_API_KEY that overrides subscription login and fails runs with 401. An empty env override on the agent resolves it until upstream fixes the injection.

Governed agent orchestration, zero glue code

If your orchestrator drives Claude Code, Mneme’s enforcement comes along for free — one decision corpus, enforced at the same pre-tool boundary in interactive, orchestrated, and CI contexts.